Bhagwati Prasad v. Chandramaul
Rule established
Amendment of pleadings introducing a new cause of action is permitted if it does not constitute a fresh suit barred by limitation. Courts should lean towards amendments that serve justice, not defeat it.
Facts
- A party sought to amend the plaint to introduce a new ground or cause of action
- The opposing party objected that the amendment introduced an entirely new case
- The question was the limit of the court's power to allow amendments
Issue
- Whether amendment of pleadings can introduce a new cause of action, and what limits apply.
Held
- Order VI Rule 17 grants wide power to amend pleadings
- Courts should lean toward allowing amendments that serve justice
- An amendment introducing a new cause of action is permissible if:
- It does not constitute a fresh suit barred by limitation
- It does not cause irremediable prejudice that costs cannot compensate
Ratio Decidendi
Amendments should be liberally permitted to serve justice. New cause of action is permissible if not barred by limitation and not causing irremediable prejudice.
How to use it in an exam
- Key line: "In Bhagwati Prasad (1966), the Supreme Court held that amendment introducing a new cause of action is permitted if not barred by limitation. Courts lean toward amendments serving justice."
Source
Source: AIR 1966 SC 735; verified via standard CPC references
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.